Washington, D.C., is a world unto itself: inside the bubble, where politicians and their kept pundits endlessly massage each others’ egos (and bank accounts), the world is America’s oyster, to be greedily gulped and washed down with a swig of the Imperial City’s most popular intoxicant – hubris. Oblivious to the unwholesome spectacle of their ongoing public orgy, the Bourbons of the foreign policy establishment ignore growing hostility emanating from us peasants in flyover country – to their peril.

Let’s look at the numbers. While the downing of MH17 has politicians in both
parties calling for direct US intervention in Ukraine, a
recent poll of voters in battleground states has a pathetic 17 percent agreeing
with them – and more than double that opposed. While the poll was taken before
this latest ginned up "crisis," most Americans aren’t paying the least
bit of attention to the war propaganda coming out of Washington – they are tuning
it out just as they have steadfastly ignored the neocons’ recent call to arms urging us to re-invade Iraq. Bill Kristol’s assessment that Americans are just
waiting to be "rallied"
to the cause underscores the delusional blindness not only of the neocons but
of the entire foreign policy establishment, which routinely pushes grandiose
projects normal Americans scoff at. The Politico poll puts a mere 19
percent in favor of Commander Kristol’s Iraqi expeditionary force.

The tone-deafness of our political class when it comes to foreign policy was underscored by a recent trip to Kentucky by newly-elevated Republican majority leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Goldman Sachs). Asked what he thought about Sen. Rand Paul’s nascent presidential campaign, McCarthy said he could support Paul if nominated but made a point of distancing himself from the Kentucky Senator’s increasingly visible opposition to Washington’s foreign policy of global meddling:

"I see what’s happening in the world. Do not think if you’re an isolationist…
I do not think that’s a strength for America. I think there’s a reason why America
should lead. I think it makes the world safer. It makes America safer. I think
being president of the United States, you should be strong.”

The recent rash of attacks on "isolationism" by leading Republican warmongers is doing nothing but making us isolationists more popular than ever – and is turning what is supposed to be a marginalizing epithet into a compliment and a political asset for politicians like Sen. Paul. I have news for the Majority Leader: Americans want to be isolated from the violence and chaos of a wacked-out world. Not only that, but they resist the superior "wisdom" of Washington know-it-alls who say such a policy is neither practical nor possible.

If the new meaning of "isolationism" is that one doesn’t want the country fighting other peoples’ wars, then ordinary people in this country will increasingly embrace it – no matter how many times John McCain and Peter King liken anti-interventionists like Paul to such half-forgotten historical figures as Charles Lindbergh. Insofar as Americans vaguely recall the Lone Eagle, they remember his transatlantic flight, not his views on US entry into World War II. And I think most Americans would be shocked by the assumption that we’re on the cusp of yet another world conflict: they are smart enough to know that not every conflict is the equivalent of a global holocaust that killed over 60 million – and naïve enough to be shocked that some people want nothing more than to blow every international incident into the occasion for a world war. If disbelief in this dark vision is "isolationism," then the overwhelming majority are for it.

Senator Paul clearly sees this, which is why he is putting his supposedly un-Republican foreign policy views front and center, taking on McCain, Christie, Rubio, and calling out the neocons by name. As the Louisville (Kentucky) Courierreports:

"Paul doesn’t see his positions as revolutionary or politically risky. In fact, he thinks it’s the folks who are calling him an isolationist who are out of step with the rest of the country.

“’I think there’s a disconnect between the American people and Washington,”
Paul said Monday. ‘Washington often lags a decade behind American opinion. I
think I’m actually where the people are, and it’s going to take everybody else
awhile to figure this out.’

"To make his case, Paul points to Iraq, noting the neocon voices who are saying the U.S. should send troops, or in some cases, never should have left.

“’They’re outliers,’ Paul said. ‘They are somewhere on the extreme end of the spectrum because that’s not where the majority of the American people are.’”

"Outliers" is one way to put it, but since this is a family-friendly web site I’ll refrain from getting more specific. Most Americans may be unfamiliar with the arcane lingo of Washington-speak, but they do know who and what a neocon is, and what they know is bad news for the War Party.

McCarthy opines that Sen. Paul may become more "educated," i.e. talked out of his more angular stances by, presumably, the Republican donor class, who agree with the new Majority Leader that "our friends don’t trust us and our enemies don’t fear us." What this misses is the commonsensical view of the man-in-the-street, who knows we don’t have any real "friends" – due not only to the nature of the world we live in, but also because we’re so good at making enemies.

McCarthy is right about one thing, however: “Whoever gets through the primary," he avers, "I think foreign policy will be a very strong element.” To which the Courier reporter adds: "What’s telling at this point is that both Paul and his critics think that’s a good thing."

As Daniel Larison points out in The American Conservative, "If some Republicans still respond favorably to boilerplate hawkish claims, just as many now seem to be rejecting them."I would go further and baldly assert the majority of GOP’ers are just as sick of the neocons’wars as the rest of the country, if not more so. Falling back on the assumption that GOP primary voters are as reflexively warlike as the editorial staff of the Weekly Standard may prove to be the War Party’s fatal error.

A recent Pew poll graphed a stunning reversal of what it means to be on the "right" and on the "left" in terms of foreign policy: Pew found 71 percent of "steadfast conservatives" want to focus more at home than overseas, with Republican-leaning "young outsiders" generally agreeing and only "business conservatives" (i.e. the crony capitalist-ExIm Bank crowd) dissenting. This is the winning coalition Sen. Paul is hoping to mobilize.

What’s surprising – and really kind of sad, actually – is the same poll shows both the "next generation left" and "solid liberals" as enthusiastic interventionists, with the "faith and family left" and liberal "hard-pressed skeptics" siding with conservative opponents of global interventionism.

Let’s hope Sen. Paul is right about the political class lagging at least a decade behind the American people – a decade in which an entire generation has grown up without ever knowing peace – and pray they don’t wake up in time to realize how badly they’re losing.

Like the Bourbon queen who trilled "Let them eat cake!" as the peasant masses seethed, the Republican grandees who think they can wield their vaunted veto power over the 2016 nominee may be in for quite a surprise. Unfortunately, they will evade Marie Antoinette’s fate, but at least they’ll suffer it figuratively. The beheading of the beastlike war-god, and his Washington-based priesthood, is going to be a spectacle worth waiting and working for.

And I, like Madame Defarge, will sit up front, knitting and nursing a smile.

NOTES IN THE MARGIN

You can check out my Twitter feed by going here.
But please note that my tweets are sometimes deliberately provocative, often
made in jest, and largely consist of me thinking out loud.

201231776040 Responseshttp%3A%2F%2Foriginal.antiwar.com%2Fjustin%2F2014%2F07%2F22%2Fthe-new-meaning-of-isolationism%2FThe+New+Meaning+of+%27Isolationism%272014-07-23+06%3A00%3A43Justin+Raimondohttp%3A%2F%2Foriginal.antiwar.com%2F%3Fp%3D2012317760 to “The New Meaning of ‘Isolationism’”

I would say that the most loathed people in the Republican leadership by the base of the party are McCain, Grahame, and King. That is why the media puts them on TV the most. The elites of the party are desperate not to have a real debate on foreign policy. That's why they push people like Perry, King, Christie etc. to speak out. So far they are not getting good reviews. Like Justin said the base is sick of big government and big wars.

Hooray for Sen. Paul as far as he goes. What I find troubling is that he seems to be hypnotized by the "Israel first" and "Israel is always right" crowd. His apparent non-interventionist views and views on Israel are not compatible.

It's still remarkable to read such empty nonsense. US interference everywhere "makes the world safer." Tell that to the millions dead and wounded since America started its frivolous premeditated wars of aggression. "It makes America safer." Right…someone educate McCarthy on the term "blowback" or inform him about the numbers of Americans dead and wounded and traumatized.

"I think being president of the United States, you should be strong.” And I think "being" a representative, "you should" be literate and have a worldview more sophisticated than a comic for 12 year olds. Washington culture has degenerated in a few years and gone back to an era before humans appeared on earth. "Strength" is the only concept these morons can utter. As if everyone on earth were some poor rodent trying to survive in the jungle. Of course the very people repeating this word ad nauseam are the least likely to exhibit it. Oh I too would love to see a strong president and senators and representatives. Strong enough to drive aipac out of town and the country by force. Strong enough to jail all the wall street crooks who nearly bankrupted the planet. Strong enough to tell the corporate weasels to start competing instead of begging for special treatment. Strong enough to ship the neocons and their extended families to the middle of a warzone.

"Our friends don’t trust us and our enemies don’t fear us." And how the hell do you expect Germany to trust us if all we do is spy on it? And how on earth could israel fear us if US politicians are nothing but cheap whores working for aipac, their pimp.

I know you're not so good with the "facts…but let's just stick with the "facts" for a second…

What did Randy say:

"Well absolutely, we stand with Israel, but what I think we should do is announce to the world, and i think it is well-known, that any attack on Israel will be treated as an attack on the United States. "

Claiming that "an attack on Israel will be treated as an attack on the United States" is not so-called "Isolationism"…and it's certainly not "non-intervention"…it's not even so-called "realism"… I don't even know what it is besides "Israel Firsterism": trying to 'officially' transform The United States into 'The United States of Israel'.

One needs to wonder: 'why would Israel even need a military at all if the US military, as Randy seems to propose, will do 'Master Israel's' bidding for them'???

'Let's' just be serious, and honest, here for once Justin…puuuuuuuuuuuulease…….

"What’s surprising – and really kind of sad, actually – is the same poll shows both the "next generation left" and "solid liberals" as enthusiastic interventionists, with the "faith and family left" and liberal "hard-pressed skeptics" siding with conservative opponents of global interventionism. "

Justin, can't you see what's happening? The left was all so "antiwar" war when the president had an "R" beside his name. Now, hypocrites that they are, since the president has a "D" beside his name imperialism is ok. When and if an "R" get's back in The Imperial Chair soon the left will once again switch back while the so-called "antiwar right" will become crazed warmongers again.

It's sad but true I'm sorry to say. Both sides are cowards and hypocrites. Maybe I'm just very cynical now but I'm not buying it yet.

I think it's a fair question to ask if "grassroots", conservatives and libertarians are not being set-up here, "Washington style", with the isolationism or "anti-war" rhetoric from just another politician.

Some pre-election Obamisms for you to ponder:

"We continue to be in a war that should never have been authorized”
“I am proud of the fact that way back in 2002, I said that this war was a mistake.”
"As president, Barack Obama will close the detention facility at Guantanamo"
“We reject the use of national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime.”
“We will revisit the Patriot Act and overturn unconstitutional executive decisions issued during the past eight years.”

It's perhaps a better litmus test to check on any candidate's view on Israel as that will predict his actions and policy later way more accurately. Point in case: last ten presidents at least.

Lil' Ran' "Obama" Paul will talk a good game but when it comes down to getting the job done, he will scurry like a ferret up the first banker dress he can find and do the bidding of the War Street-Israel-City Axis of Evil and Banality. The first thing he did regarding the Gulf disaster was say some sweet words for the Queen's own BP. He loves the War Pigs in Tel Aviv. He wants to fight the war against OUR ISIS creation with nifty little high tech weapons and mercenaries instead of porcine Americans with inhalers…which, undoubtedly, will endear him to the football fans of America…

In economics, he has proposed more breaks for Corporations in the form of these enterprise zones–low wages for the denizens of economically bombed-out cities that our Corporate Citizens have created throughout the US. His father, at least, spoke out against the attacks on Putin…but, Dr. Paul…for all of his inspiring chatter, has the bad habit of leaving his supporters in the lurch come election day…and pointing them towards his sorry son now that he isn't running–and, I still remember his Skull and Bones advisor…

Sanctions! The same direction as the Brzezsinski Gang, Bathhouse Barry, and the New York Banker Gang want to go…BRICS can be a game changer…the writing is on the wall…You might not be able "to fix stupid"…as Ron White is famous for saying…but you sure can send it into one hell of a death spiral of depression and turmoil…The "world" is decidedly not with us…outside a pack of howler monkeys with votes at the UN who scamper around at Washington's bidding……..for now.

He gets time in TIME, his face is in the Fascist media…To give the dog his due, Senator Paul stood against the Syria involvement, facing down John Kerry, who is giving Barry O'bomb'em some stiff competition for the title of 'Biggest Liar in America' with his claim to having proof of Assad using chemical weapons some 35 times against the American backed terrorists waging war against civilization in Syria…and against new sanctions against Iran.

This buys him a little, but, poitically…his vote and voice weren't needed for the War Pig Congress to continue its attacks on Iran and Syria on behalf of Israel and War Street. John Kerry, in his run for the presidency opposed action against Iran, if memory serves. Lil' Ran's actions give him some 'street creds' which he will use to win the votes of anti-war Americans for the Republican franchise of the NWO as president or VP…Like William Jennings Bryan, he will then be betrayed by a gang of pro-Israeli, pro-bank, pro-war scum bags and either have to do the honorable thing and resign or continue, as he is continuing today and his father continued before him to be a good Republican…

Yeah, like Prinzowhales above, I'm afraid the RP is simply a blank slate — like o'bomber before him — onto which people who are dissatisfied with the status quo can write their wishful thinking. Then, once they've played the voters for the complete suckers we are, they go into office and do obeisance before the very interest groups that have brought us to our current sad state. RP is a simulacrum of a man with principles.

Rand Paul is for Israel as much as Wilson was for peace in 1916, and FDR in 1940, and the Neocons know it. It's called getting elected first. Why make a big stink now when you can't do anything about it? Let Israel show it's colors to the world and the Neocons continue with their self destruction. The campaign, if there is one, starts in about a year.

common sense tells us that there is no strategic nor tactical value in deliberately shooting down a passenger plane–and especially by a country which EU/US [or even UN] picks as an enemy for itself.
in addition, we cannot read minds; thus, cannot prove whether the shoot-down was deliberate or not.
we need, then, to stop waging politics when accidents happen, say, a ship runs into another, plane breaks in two or explodes, hammer hits the thumb….

isolationism [and whatever the label means or entails] appears as a mere tactic, tool, etc.
however, tactics always change because facts on the ground constantly change.
but the end-goal never ever changes regardless how much, say, isolationism, changes. we can be certain that isolationism would be in constant flux: rising, falling, disappearing. reappearing, etc.

95% of americans think, i think, that it is not tactics but end-goal when US does or says it does good in the world or just acts as a policeperson among fighting, unruly, disputing, undemocratic countries or regions.
possibly 95% of americans think that US has no other end-solution in mind than to bring peace, democratize the world, etc.
actually, it is true that US/et al countries want to establish a permanent peace on the globe; alas, also impose by any means whatever americanism on it or what's left of it after temperatures rise 2-4 degrees celsius and possibly 5 – 6 billion people expire.

Why the bad rap for Lindbergh? He was right in opposing America's foolish policies that moved us towards war. And the organization voluntarily dissolved itself when the war actually began. WW2 is wrongly considered America's "good" war.

[…] in a recent poll conducted by Politico, it found that most Americans aren’t paying the least bit of attention to the war propaganda coming out of Washington…a deliberate ignorance they will surely pay for much sooner than […]

[…] in a recent poll conducted by Politico, it found that most Americans aren’t paying the least bit of attention to the war propaganda coming out of Washington…a deliberate ignorance they will surely pay for much sooner than […]

but england for whom nato exists and who is the real decicder of us foreing and defence policy will never let usa NOT take sides-it has to be entngled with who so ever is the nemy of moment in eyes of english parasite nation.,

"Which party do you trust more to handle foreign policy? The Democratic or the Republican party?"

Geez, if there was ever a question that begging for a "neither" response. With the one with get a war of aggression on Iraq, with the other we get backing of literal fascists in the name of U.S. foreign policy. Maybe the 28% not sure are the one's catching on.

The writer of this article is on target. Out here in "flyover country" where most of the soldiers come from in this country, we are damned sick and tired of sacrificing our sons and daughters for a bunch a pricks running our government, our banks and wanting to starve us all onto food stamps. Hey US Senate, listen up you damned old, OLD sob's. Maybe next time you want us to fight your wars, we won't come. You fight them yourselves you bunch of loud mouthed elitist politicians. I say we are not afraid of Russia or anyone else but the way you have treated us we are not interested in fighting your wars. Rand Paul is right about that part. When Russia attacks us we will do them. The poverty you are sinking us all into is not about us it is about you. Why should we fight for you! Tell your psyco puppetmasters hidden in their little mansions to defend their own bazillion dollar empires. Screw you!

This is wishful thinking. The fact of the matter is, Rand Paul has kissed the ring. His isolationism makes an exception for Israel and that's all that the "Israel-first" faction care about. That's the price you pay if you want to play The Presidential Sweepstakes and not have the media take a big dump on your campaign.

We need to recognize the big thing – there will be no savior on a white horse who is going to step up, get elected, and then "straighten" out America. It just isn't going to happen. A
Rand Paul, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, or some yet unknown Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, or FDR is only going to step up if (and only if) they will promote and support the warheads, the greedheads, the Zionists, etc. Why? – because the game is rigged and they rig it. The most important discovery that the Americans need to make is the rot has gone too deep to fix by "electing the right person". It is going to take a revolution. It doesn't need to be bloody, but it must be a revolution – a complete rejection of the people running America. A "spit in their face" if you will. All it would take is about 10 or 20 million Americans deciding to reject and challenge everything (the media, the consumer schlock, the two political parties, the hoorah patridiotic crap, etc.) that binds us to imperial monster that we now serve. That is all it will take and it is the only thing that will work.

There will be a great temptation to "sit this one out" – go about one's quiet life, keep drawing a comfortable pension or salary, and seek happiness away from the fray. But unless, you are counting on dying in the next several years, you are going to be in this fight whether you seek it or not. The warpigs (the McCains, Boltons, etc) will not tolerate the Putins, Chavez's, the Hamas' – they will drag you into their little Armageddon. The greedheads do not have enough money yet – they still covet your little pension or comfortable salary – and they will eventually get it. Besides there is a new generation of Bernie Madoffs coming along and they haven't even bought their first Mercedes yet. And the Zionists are also going to drag everyone in until much more Arab land and water and oil is their's. There will be no sidelines in the battle for America, so unless you plan to die soon or develop Altzheimers, you will be in it. Steel yourself.

Great take non Rand's foreign policy of non-intervention. Thanks for a truthful article!!

Fringe stream media & the CINO GOP-RNC lovers of the bloated military industrial complex fear that people are waking up, so they shove war mongers like John McManchurian in our faces.

If you have yet to do so, please explore on the net to find The Difference Between Isolationism And Non-interventionist. There is a huge difference! But fringe media just keeps trying to manipulate what they think are easy to manipulate Homer Simpsons, US, into thinking the non-intervention means isolation. Such LIARS they are!!

Homer Simpson is the new name for useful idiots. You can look that up under Easy To Manipulate Homer Simpsons. I grin & smile when I read that…:-)

Ron & Rand Paul both have the same take on US foreign policy as the US Founders. Our Founders were hardly 'isolationist'.

bb, If the USA wants to establish a similar form of govt as ours around the world, we should quit bossing every one around, meddling in their affairs & so on.

What we need to do is set a good example. Our long standing FP of Interventionism & more recently NSA spying, has hurt US relationships badly around the world. I know that those countries, or most of them, that complain about our spying also spy on US. And unfortunately in today's global climate, we do need some info on what other nations are up to.

I do think, however, that we very possibly would not need so much spying if we had not contributed so much to the unrest we now see enveloping the planet. We have been messing in the ME since at least the 50's, setting up dictators, taking them down, giving weapons away that end up in terrorist hands, drone strikes, bombing & so on…all due to the interventionist FP our Founders warned US against.

Who wants our style of corrupt, over controlling, freedom stifling govt when they already have their own version? It is OUR OWN interventionism that gave rise to most if not all the terrorist groups.

Ron Paul was shot in the back by every establishment 'news' service over & over. Including 'fair & balanced Fox 'News'. All of them did their best to marginalize, disparage, ignore or out right lie about the best Constitutional candidate we've had the blessing to see in many a long decade.

True they didn't physically kill Ron, woulda brought way to much heat on the NWO establishment. But make no mistake, Ron was 'assassinated' many times. I think they figured out that if they control the narrative via disingenuous media, which gives them the ability to distort the truth, it doesn't matter what the candidate says.

Then there is the little matter of black box vote fraud…

SamFox
That is why the media 'bullet', isolationist, is still being chambered & shot now at Rand.

[…] in a recent poll conducted by Politico, it found that most Americans aren’t paying the least bit of attention to the war propaganda coming out of Washington…a deliberate ignorance they will surely pay for much sooner than […]

Justin Raimondo is the editorial director of Antiwar.com, and a senior fellow at the Randolph Bourne Institute. He is a contributing editor at The American Conservative, and writes a monthly column for Chronicles. He is the author of Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement [Center for Libertarian Studies, 1993; Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2000], and An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard [Prometheus Books, 2000].